1814 O-107' PRIME R-7 Capped Bust Half Dollar

jacrispies

Spotted this scratched up beauty and just had to add it to my 1814 overton set. Has anyone else seen a prime 1814 O-107 before?

The only example I found is currently listed in Herrman's price guide, sold unattributed at Heritage in 2011 and is the example of the prime on Dave's Bust Half Dollar Site. There is also one sold as an O-107' on Eye Appealing Coins but that example is a misattributed 109. Looking forward to hearing thoughts.

Photo below is my coin plus the closeup of the unchipped N, compared to the Heritage/Dave's example.

LanceNewmanOCC

maibockaddict has one on his attribution site. has it listed as R7?. ( i question the middle coin on the 1814 107 page as the date is pretty far from the rim) a great site i've visited many times over the years.

i could probably find a couple others if i really dug but not off the top of my head.

you can check the registry set coins too. also, checking idk, half a dozen of the big auction houses archives could yield some results.

do you have access to the cbh marriage census?

looks like a nice find.

jacrispies

@LanceNewmanOCC As I said in the OP, the only one I found is the maibockaddict example, which is the same coin as the sole unattributed example on Heritage. I could not find any other example.

Unfortunately I do not have access to the CBH census, although I would imagine that would be a fantastic resource. I need quite a few more bust halves before I can get into the BHNC.

Maybe there are some BHNC members around here to help us out...

LanceNewmanOCC

there may be some nuts to be dug from this thread. i haven't went through it but in the search abridged descript, i did see something about 1814 107 prime.

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/559674/1814-the-latest-in-the-ongoing-bust-half-series

to add: while i didn't see any specific info regarding 107 primes, when doing work for top census coins, it usually requires a lot of legwork. (amazing as many images are still up in this thread as there are)

https://forums.collectors.com/discussion/883153/how-about-a-cbh-thread-that-requires-overton-r3s-and-up-one-purdy-lady-per-post-please/p1

there is one in the slot in this set:

https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/half-dollars/early-half-dollars-specialty-sets/capped-bust-half-dollars-die-variety-state-set-by-overton-circulation-strikes-1807-1836/alltimeset/172235

you can look through these. CBH by overton AND die state:

https://www.pcgs.com/setregistry/half-dollars/early-half-dollars-specialty-sets/capped-bust-half-dollars-die-variety-state-set-by-overton-circulation-strikes-1807-1836/2246

pcgs pop - this shows actual attributed coin pops. whether or not you believe they are accurate is another matter.

https://www.pcgs.com/pop/detail/capped-bust-half-dollar-1807-1839/120 - coin 39484 is the prime state with 39485 being the A. - this shows 46. i almost always figure the numbers in the pops are skewed to some degree from crack-outs.

https://www.ngccoin.com/census/united-states/half-dollars/232/varieties/16105/ - does NOT appear to separate the prime from the A or they just haven't attributed any.

if pcgs does show over 40, then there should be some bust half sales with 1814 primes out there. i'm not going after those links just now. i gotta see just how raymond reddington is going to squirm outta federal prison, THIS TIME! lol

jacrispies

@LanceNewmanOCC Thank you for the references. The 107 prime is not a seperate Overton die state, thus not in the die state registry sets. Just because a coin is labeled 107 doesn't mean it is the prime die state. I looked through all 11 of current sets, and none of the 107's were the prime die state.

I did find one prime example in the first link you posted, in which I recalled seeing that coin before on that thread. All three examples found so far are all described as 107.2, all having the rough die feature between the ribbon ends on the obverse. Food for thought, maybe some 107.1's can be tracked down.

LanceNewmanOCC

@jacrispies said:

.
how about this one. i didn't see it mentioned in this thread.

08/07 Downey MBS33 (Rutherford) AU50 light hairlines (his auction archives, if they exist at the very least i would expect to have SOME census info in any 1814 107 descript?)

is sheridan downey the person that has those cbh auctions? i remember reading about 1-2 different people that have them outside the big auctions houses.

jacrispies

Yes that example was listed in Herrman's price guide. Since I could not search back that early, I could not confirm it was indeed the prime die state.

LanceNewmanOCC

same auctions, different link. sheridans come with images.

https://www.pcgs.com/auctionprices/auctionsalessummary/sheridan-downey/firmid/10205

https://www.sheridanscoins.com/inc_past-auctions.php

probably all i can dig up at this point.

i may dig into some auction archives for those 107 in pcgs/ngc holders.

i'm sure someone here probably has the info available though.

jacrispies

Thanks. I checked Sheridan Downey's website earlier, but the auctions don't go back to MBS #33 in 2007. I don't know if there is a long term archive but these usual sources don't go back that far.

I am looking to hearing other's responses as well, maybe someone can shed some light on how rare this die state is truely.

pursuitofliberty

Pretty significant find, even in that condition.

I know he's gone with family this weekend, but I'll bet @drddm can shed some light on this. Dave is a 1814 aficionado, and a literal encyclopedia of information. I can think of a few other names that don't post here (as far as I know) that would be interested to see that.

As far as the AU50 listed in the AMBPR, Sheridan Downey is the go to Master for Capped Bust as a dealer, mentor and researcher (IMO), and so I would suspect if it was called the prime and listed in one of his auctions as such ... it was the real deal. I haven't seen the AU50, but @lkeigwin may have ... or may have taken the images (if available; not sure exactly which auction he started taking Sheridan's images, but it would be close to this time frame I think). Lance was attending FUN with Sheridan this week, so give it a day of two for him to respond.

We (members of the BHNC) are still showing that as an R7 or R8 in the Die State Progressions study (depending on which Die State you have), a copy of which can be obtained through Dave Kahn's website (another outstanding reference for CBH's). The "Die State Progressions of the Capped Bust Half Dollar, Die Varieties 1807-1836" is an excellent reference to add to your library.

I happen to be the proud and current caretaker of the 107a in P58cac, ex-Link, which I have shown here before. I'm going to refrain as I don't want to muddy your thread.

I'll hope we get some other members to chime in and help answer your questions.

jacrispies

@pursuitofliberty I really appreciate the reply. I was a bit hesitant about sharing this coin, but in the end, I hope to use this as a opportunity to make connections in the bust half world. It is good to know Sheridan Downey is also a mentor and researcher, I look forward to meeting him eventually.

Since I haven't been around in this specialized niche a super long time (about 3 years), and I am 19 years old, I hope to build connections with the BHNC and other significant researchers so I can get involved in the in-depth study of bust halves. As of right now, I am laser focused on the varieties of 1814 and am thrilled to add this to my small but ever growing set. I am researching different anomalies to eventually write an article in the John Reich Journal.

I did pick up the very reasonably priced "Die State Progressions of the Capped Bust Half Dollar, Die Varieties 1807-1836" and frequently use it in the study of die progressions. It is a fantastic resource and I have already started marking my copy up with personal notes and specialized info. I would recommend the resource if anyone hasn't purchased it yet.

I did notice there is the O-107.1 (no defect by ribbon) and O-107.2 (defect present, no die chip in N), but "prime" would mean no die cracks or defects at all. Do examples exist that do not exhibit the defect by the ribbon ends? If so, wouldn't the 107.2 not be considered a "prime" die state?

blaircountycoin

I was very interested in this post. It made me look at my 1814 Bust Half. I do not have the experience that most of you have, but I was interested in what overton my coin is since it shows 2 of the main attributes of the one shown. Thank you in advance for your help.

Pnies20

A PCGS XF45 example sold in MB54 for $1871 with juice. It goes without saying a r7 die state will have few examples for you to peruse on the internet.

Edit to add Sheridan’s description/
An important coin for the die state enthusiast. High rims, crisp dentils and squared-off devices announce an early die state. Distinct recutting of the 4 and the first 1 in the date provide confirmation. Note, also, the absence of the ubiquitous die chip in N of UNITED. Herrman identifies but two auction offerings and suggests an R.7 rarity rating. The untoned coin exhibits luster in protected areas. The surfaces were gently wiped. I have not seen or handled a prime 1814 O.107 since 2007. It is worth remembering that this die pair, in a later die state, was used to strike the platinum half-dollars of 1814. Estimate: $ ????

Nice find!

pursuitofliberty

@jacrispies

Many of us would love to help, and as a former Associate Member in the BHNC (a limited membership for those who have "the fever" but haven't amassed the requisite 100 Die Marriages), we may want to discuss finding someone in your area to help you along that path. It was EXTREMELY helpful for me. PM me and we can get to know each other a little better and discuss, and maybe I can make some introductions.

As I mentioned, one of our members here @drddm is a 1814 fanatic, and a super good guy. I hope he reaches out to you also.

You mention the without the die chip and without the rough die feature between the ribbon ends. Very astute. Notice how the progression we list goes.

We are convinced the true prime state is like what yours appears to be ... no chip, no rough die break between to ribbon ends and the S10/S11 placement. As the rough die came first, then the die chip happened, both of those should not exist for a true prime state.

HOWEVER, that condition appears to be so rare that the 107 is almost always the rough die area and the chip, but without the chip on the nose.

Hope this helps.

.

I'm going to share mine to help @blaircountycoin identify his. BCC, I can't tell from your images if yours has the nose bump feature, but you do have the rough die break and the die chip in the N, and not the additional die chip in the serif of the first one (latest die state). If you have the nose bump, yours is a 107a, if not it's a 107. Yours is cleaned of course, but has some meat left, and should be easily identifiable.

Mine is the 107.a (107.4), sometimes referred to as the "Mouse on Nose".

Very large images if you click and open in another window, by my good friend Lance K.

blaircountycoin

Mine does not have the nose bump, but has the n chip. The coin seems to have a lot of clashing

Pnies20

I guess since all the cool kids are doing it..

Mine has just a dot on the nose where the “mouse” is forming and just a dot in the serif of the second one where the chip is forming there. I guess you could say she's an adolescent that hasn't decided what to do in life yet (pretty cool die clashing too!)

pursuitofliberty

@Pnies20 said:
I guess since all the cool kids are doing it..

Mine has just a dot on the nose where the “mouse” is forming and just a dot in the serif of the second one where the chip is forming there. I guess you could say she's an adolescent that hasn't decided what to do in life yet (pretty cool die clashing too!)

Love it! Thanks for sharing yours, and pointing out the example from this summer. I had forgot about that.

jacrispies

@Pnies20 Thanks for the info on the sale of the 107' in August. Lovely coin too!

@pursuitofliberty PM sent! I appreciate the additional info as well. Beautiful coin, thanks for sharing!

LanceNewmanOCC

i think i saw a jules reiver example during last evenings searches.

should i post a link?

jacrispies

@LanceNewmanOCC said:
i think i saw a jules reiver example during last evenings searches.

should i post a link?

Yes.

LanceNewmanOCC

jacrispies

That is the same example sold on eye appealing coins. It was misattributed, and in reality it is a 109.

LanceNewmanOCC

@jacrispies said:
That is the same example sold on eye appealing coins. It was misattributed, and in reality it is a 109.

.
wow, that only took a few seconds to find a diagnostic to show it isn't a 107. guess i shoulda done that to begin with.

the 5 in 50 in relation to the claws (since the T-I is nearly the same) is more than enough that this should have not been attributed as a 107.

thanks

jacrispies

@LanceNewmanOCC said:

@jacrispies said:
That is the same example sold on eye appealing coins. It was misattributed, and in reality it is a 109.

.
wow, that only took a few seconds to find a diagnostic to show it isn't a 107. guess i shoulda done that to begin with.

the 5 in 50 in relation to the claws (since the T-I is nearly the same) is more than enough that this should have not been attributed as a 107.

thanks

To begin with, I noticed it was a LDS, and the variety in question is a prime die state. From memory, I noticed it had the wide date which narrowed it down to either 102 or 109, and several other diagnostics like the strong D in UNITED confirmed it to be the 109.

lkeigwin

Here are better images of the 14-107 from MB53, mentioned by @Pnies20 above.
Lance.

jacrispies

Thank you @lkeigwin for the additional photos, those are phenomenal. I see a difference from that coin to my example and the maibockaddict example. I noticed this minute disparity a few days ago but shrugged it off because my example was the same as the maibockaddict variety plate example.

Inside the N where the chip is developing, the V portion comes to a razor-sharp point at the valley of the N as seen on the MB53 example pictured above. My example and the maibockaddict example all show a little rounding to the valley, thus showing a microscopic progression between the die state. The MB53 coin is the true prime and was likely one of the first couple dozen struck, considering it has almost no dentil deterioration and a visible scribe line around the perimeter.

The MB53 coin still has the die defect behind the ribbons on the obverse. If this coin was one of the first few struck, and the defect is apparent, that means this is probably as early die state as it gets. Unless the BHNC has photographs of an earlier die state without the defects behind the ribbon, then I don't think the 107.1 exists.

Pnies20

http://hlrc.com/Inventory/CoinViewer?id=869530001&c=23

I don't think this example has been mentioned. PCGS VF35. It would be nice to see it in hand, but the die defect at the ribbons looks to be in its infancy here.

drddm

@jacrispies…the 1814 O.107’ referenced and pictured above that sold in MB53 was my coin. I found it in a dealer’s inventory a few years back as an unattributed 1814. It is the earliest die state for this marriage that I have come across. I have not heard of one without the die defect near the ribbon but supposedly it exists. I would love to see one if someone can locate it. I have heard though of an 1814 O.107 prime in MS years ago. I will try to see if I can find an image and post it here.

Dave

jacrispies

Here is another VF-35 as a BIN for $2,500: https://www.collectorscorner.com/Products/Item.aspx?id=59735108

Photos of that coin:

Starting to think this is more of an R-6 at most. There seems to be more than 12 known EDS examples, especially knowing there are always coins that were tucked away and forgotten that haven't surfaced or been attributed yet.

Pnies20

@jacrispies said:
Here is another VF-35 as a BIN for $2,500: https://www.collectorscorner.com/Products/Item.aspx?id=59735108

Photos of that coin:

Starting to think this is more of an R-6 at most. There seems to be more than 12 known EDS examples, especially knowing there are always coins that were tucked away and forgotten that haven't surfaced or been attributed yet.

That is the coin I listed a few posts above this on HLRC.

@Pnies20 said:
http://hlrc.com/Inventory/CoinViewer?id=869530001&c=23

I don't think this example has been mentioned. PCGS VF35. It would be nice to see it in hand, but the die defect at the ribbons looks to be in its infancy here.

jacrispies

@Pnies20 You are right, my mistake. Different websites but the same coin, thanks for catching that.

I did find ANOTHER VF example that hasn't been listed on this thread. I am not going to post photos yet, I do not currently own it.

jacrispies

Here is #7 prime example found on the CoinZip message boards! A minor misaligned die and off center combo as well. Posted in 2012.

jacrispies

To keep the count going, 8 examples have been found so far. The coin pictured below may have been mentioned but not photographed on this thread. Perhaps this is the mint state coin.

I am thinking this die state is about an R-6 rather than an R-7 because the maximum number of 12 is coming up quick. Think about how many other examples of this die state are tucked away in collections.

jacrispies

Example #9 found on Great Collections. AU-50, sold for $815.62 on August 28, 2022, unattributed.

https://www.greatcollections.com/Coin/1188660/1814-Capped-Bust-Half-Dollar-PCGS-AU-50

jacrispies

Example #10 without the huge chip in the N. You can tell the valley of the N has a very small chip, the same state as my worn example in the OP. This indicates that this example and my example are not a true primes.

This example is on Ebay for $500, I will not be purchasing it because it is the intermediate die state and not the earliest die state.

I'll start to differentiate the small chips vs no chips to get a list of the true primes.

Victa

Interesting thread, so I checked my own Bust Half collection and may have come up with another example. I do not have the coin in hand, but will take better pics when I get it out of safe deposit box.

scubafuel

Great thread! I have learned from collecting bust quarter varieties that “primes” are never as rare as they’re made out to be. It’s just that most collectors of bust coinage like the late does states so the early states get less attention. But once you start looking for them they appear.

jacrispies

Still keeping track of these. Photographed below are a couple more that present the early die state.

In my opinion, the micro die chip examples are not the true primes. I attempted to tally all the die states counted so far but could have missed something. The totals are:
5 Confirmed true primes (no sign of die chip, sharp V). (MS?, 45, 35, 35, 30)
7 Confirmed small chips (likely will need a loupe to see, but crack is not as large as later die states). (58, 50, 50, 45, 40, 25, 10).
1 unconfirmed unverified example of the prime die state. (MB33 AU-50 wipe)

Keep in mind, these all lie within 107.2 or 107.3, while the 107.1 that is missing the obverse field gouge is unverified but apparently known.

PCGS AU-58 (surfaces look pretty dead for a 58)

ICG EF-45

pursuitofliberty

@jacrispies

While I absolutely appreciate your research, I disagree with a few of your assessments of coins shown here.

If yours is a true 107.2, then so is the ICG coin you posted last. For what it's worth, I viewed the ICG coin in hand and did not see evidence of the chip. Nor do I see it on yours. But neither has a needle sharp "V" as the valley of the N, yet again ... neither appears to have a start of a chip. In fact the ICG coin appears sharper than yours.

If needle sharp N's are the tell (I do not fully agree with this), then all 107.2's need to be reconsidered carefully. I don't see a minor degradation of the die as a "die chip". That is not how I define a die chip. I do recognize there is a starting point for a chip, but several of the coins here that you call out do not appear to have it.

I think it would be helpful if you posted what you THINK the 107.2's are and what the 107.3's are in your posting (fully referencing the coins in this thread). Maybe we can debate the images further then. Of course, those are just images, but it's all we have at the moment.

jacrispies

@pursuitofliberty
Thanks for the discussion Todd! I think we can come to a consensus together. To be clear, the small chips in the N I am talking about are much smaller than the large N chip seen on later confirmed 107.3+ die states.

I am not saying my low grade OP example is a no-chip and I have it listed as such in the above post under the small chips (as VG-10). There is a small chip that is pretty clear in the initial photos taken.

Regarding the ICG coin, I remember seeing something really small in the N when I viewed it at the ANA show this year. Perhaps smaller comparing to my OP coin. But if the claim that it is a sharp-V prime, I would like to see closeup photos to confirm. I can't see it clearly in my photos above, and I am going off of memory.

So whether or not we differentiate between the prime and micro chips is up for debate. If we wanted to solidify these findings, I may send a message to Herrman to acquire his thoughts.

Here is what has been noted so far...

107.1-2 (Sharp-V prime, no sign of chip):

107.? (early die state, small/medium chip). There may be other small degrees of the small chip, but they have not been photographed well enough to tell. This category encompasses everything past the sharp-V prime and the large chip:

107.3 (late die state, large chip):

107.3+ (largest chip, continues into the "a" die state):

pursuitofliberty

@jacrispies

Chase, there we go. Thanks for getting back on this, and also, if you do drop a line to SH, let me know what he says ... email or text is fine for that.

I agree that your image for the 107.? (2nd image above) is enough to justify a chip. And you're right, we need clear and concise images, or an in-hand inspection to tell on the very earliest states.

The sharp V (your image 1, is clear and concise, and if the obverse gouge/feature is not there, it's a .1, otherwise it's a .2).

Thanks for clarifying what you're seeing!

Pnies20

Too hard to photograph without proper equipment.

Pnies20

The “prime” word is being tossed around pretty liberally. I don’t think anyone has seen a prime of this die marriage. If they have they haven’t produced a photo.

A side bar of your study of this die chip is your assigned value to them. You don’t personally believe a coin to be worth the value of past realized prices unless it undoubtedly does not have any evidence of a die chip and are waiting for one to surface. The market doesn’t reflect this. There are so few to go around that it becomes more of what is market acceptable as an early die state. And these coins with microscopic disruptions sell for a premium. I’m not sure you’ve examined enough in hand to show that the early states don’t all share the same characteristics.

What you may have unintentionally proven is that coins without microscopic evidence of a die chip don’t exist in any collection. Then where does the rarity rating of 7ish begin? Back at square one. These are as rare as they’ve always been.

pursuitofliberty

Somewhat chiming back in here, as I don't like the word "Prime" to be used on any Die State as a nnn.2

Period.

A 107.1 is the Prime. A 107.2, no matter how early the state within that coin might be, is still a 107.2, and therefore the second known state.

And the 107.1 would not have the OBVERSE gouge/feature, regardless of the sharp-V, and that OBVERSE state is purported to exist. I have not seen it in hand, but I am respecting the research before me.

Until or unless the 107.1 is absolutely disproven, a 107.2 CANNOT be the true Prime.

Also, based on everything I have seen, the 107.2 may not be an R.7, as we currently question it as, but it is certainly at least an R.6 state ... again, from everything I know and have seen.

All that said, based on the known and listed BHNC Die State progressions, the 107.2, 107.4 and 107.5 are the three rarest of the five defined states, with the 107.2 (rough die feature obv; no die chip in N - aka "sharp-V in N") probably being the rarest (other than the 107.1 - true "Prime").

jacrispies

Well said @pursuitofliberty I agree on all points.

Would be super cool to see the obverse without the defect. I suspect the only "known" example is low grade enough to where the defect is not seen but rather worn away and reported as a true prime.

Pnies20

@pursuitofliberty said:
Somewhat chiming back in here, as I don't like the word "Prime" to be used on any Die State as a nnn.2

Period.

A 107.1 is the Prime. A 107.2, no matter how early the state within that coin might be, is still a 107.2, and therefore the second known state.

And the 107.1 would not have the OBVERSE gouge/feature, regardless of the sharp-V, and that OBVERSE state is purported to exist. I have not seen it in hand, but I am respecting the research before me.

Until or unless the 107.1 is absolutely disproven, a 107.2 CANNOT be the true Prime.

Also, based on everything I have seen, the 107.2 may not be an R.7, as we currently question it as, but it is certainly at least an R.6 state ... again, from everything I know and have seen.

All that said, based on the known and listed BHNC Die State progressions, the 107.2, 107.4 and 107.5 are the three rarest of the five defined states, with the 107.2 (rough die feature obv; no die chip in N - aka "sharp-V in N") probably being the rarest (other than the 107.1 - true "Prime").

Yes but where is the cutoff for 107.2? Thats the question I pose to chase. Do we know of any coin, MB54 included, that doesn’t have ANY disturbance in the N?Have either of you examined the MB54 coin closely enough to know whether or not this is the case? That seems to be the only one anyone is comfortable saying is a 107.2 but I don’t think it’s been examined by anyone in this thread in light of this conversation. I looked at it before that auction but I will honestly say I cannot remember.

@jacrispies turning several 14.107s down that are early die states (that have all since sold for prices coinciding with a high rarity rating) is implicitly assigning a value to them. If I offer you a coin for $800 and you say no, I know you value it for less than that. You also stated in this thread that you value an early die state at less than $500. This is fine and your prerogative but I don’t think the market agrees and there may not be one in existence that can meet your standard.

I will finish by saying the Ex-ICG coin has a very nice V.

I said Good day sir!!!

jacrispies

@Pnies20
The cutoff for 107.2 should be at any sign of a die chip in the N. That consistently goes with the process of the Bust Half Nut Club die stating process, which says, "any trace of that die crack identifies the die state." Any trace of a die chip in the N identifies itself as the "Die chip rev in N" die state.

I did not give any direct analysis of pricing, so do not assume so. You have no idea to the reasons why I passed on those coins. There is more to the story that no one here knows.

How about this, I'll give you the opportunity to buy my early die state in the OP for $150 if you want it.

There are 5 examples that I would list as a sharp-V no chip. If you don't think the MB#54 coin is not a sharp-V that is not my problem (hint: compare to same era reverses to see what a non chipped sharp-V normally looks like). If you genuinely desire to dig deeper, grab a microscope and track down the current owners to look at the coins for yourself. I am simply posting my research in this thread as examples pop up here and there with varying degrees of crackage.

My brother, these are only coins. Let's continue together in peace.

Pnies20

@jacrispies said:
@Pnies20
The cutoff for 107.2 should be at any sign of a die chip in the N. That consistently goes with the process of the Bust Half Nut Club die stating process, which says, "any trace of that die crack identifies the die state." Any trace of a die chip in the N identifies itself as the "Die chip rev in N" die state.

I did not give any direct analysis of pricing, so do not assume so. You have no idea to the reasons why I passed on those coins. There is more to the story that no one here knows.

How about this, I'll give you the opportunity to buy my early die state in the OP for $150 if you want it.

There are 5 examples that I would list as a sharp-V no chip. If you don't think the MB#54 coin is not a sharp-V that is not my problem (hint: compare to same era reverses to see what a non chipped sharp-V normally looks like). If you genuinely desire to dig deeper, grab a microscope and track down the current owners to look at the coins for yourself. I am simply posting my research in this thread as examples pop up here and there with varying degrees of crackage.

My brother, these are only coins. Let's continue together in peace.

I was attempting to be Socratic. I know what the criteria is but if there are none that fit, what does that say about the die state? I didn’t say the MB coin is not a 107.2 but have we confirmed it in hand? These disturbances are very tiny and may not have been noticed without looking for it.

I didn’t mean to upset you. Just stating that I can deduce what you think about the value of a coin based on what you wouldn’t pay for it.

jacrispies

@Pnies20
I am not upset. Just don't put words in my mouth. You cannot always assume a value from what is not paid for a coin. Too many factors at play especially when your sample size is 1.

If you can post a photo of what you are talking about regarding very tiny disturbances, we can continue on that point.